(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.04.06 2017가단15095

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.04.06 2017가단15095

건물인도 등

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Of the 1st floor of the building listed in the separate sheet, the indication of the drawings in the annexed sheet 1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 13, 12, and 1.

Reasons

On September 13, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted by the parties to the lease (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with the Defendant as indicated in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 13, 12, and 1 among the 1st floor of the building indicated in the separate sheet, the deposit amount of KRW 15,00,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,420,000 (including value-added tax), and the lease period of KRW 12,10,000,000 as of July 13, 2017, the lease contract of this case is terminated without paying a duplicate of the instant complaint.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the overdue rent and the water supply fee, and the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent up to the date of the delivery of the instant store.

The Defendant decided to run a restaurant in the instant store with C, and the Plaintiff was also aware of this, but the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease contract only with C.

Judgment

According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 5 of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement with the Defendant’s agent, and it is recognized that the Defendant had been operating a restaurant until December 19, 2016 with the trade name “D,” and the fact that the Defendant transferred KRW 10,000,000 out of the deposit KRW 15,00,000 to the Plaintiff on October 13, 2016, when the Defendant entered into the instant lease agreement, is not disputed between the parties, and the Defendant also concluded the instant lease agreement with C to operate the instant store as a partner, and the Defendant asserted that the Defendant paid KRW 10,00,000 out of the deposit to the Defendant through the Plaintiff’s agent, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant entered into the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff as a contracting party.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원여주지원 2019.11.12 2019가단2065

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.11.14 2018가합748

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.19 2019나68086

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.21 2020가단5064053

-수원지방법원 2018.08.30 2018나56251